Arthroscopic Bankart repair vs. Latarjet procedure for recurrent shoulder instability: a meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complication rates in general and athletic populations

The Bankart repair and Latarjet procedure are both effective surgical methods for treating repeated recurrent anterior dislocation of the shoulder. However, there is still little consensus regarding the standard treatment for recurrent anterior instability of the shoulder. Typically, the choice of t...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery 2024-12, Vol.33 (12), p.e652-e674
Hauptverfasser: Hossein Zadeh, Reza, Daliri, Mahla, Sadeghi, Masoumeh, Hossein Zadeh, Rasoul, Sahebi, Mahdieh, Moradi, Ali, Samei, Mahdieh, Ebrahimzadeh, Mohammad H.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e674
container_issue 12
container_start_page e652
container_title Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery
container_volume 33
creator Hossein Zadeh, Reza
Daliri, Mahla
Sadeghi, Masoumeh
Hossein Zadeh, Rasoul
Sahebi, Mahdieh
Moradi, Ali
Samei, Mahdieh
Ebrahimzadeh, Mohammad H.
description The Bankart repair and Latarjet procedure are both effective surgical methods for treating repeated recurrent anterior dislocation of the shoulder. However, there is still little consensus regarding the standard treatment for recurrent anterior instability of the shoulder. Typically, the choice of treatment has been influenced more by training and tradition rather than the existing evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare patient-reported outcomes, recurrence, and complications between the 2 procedures, among both athletic and nonathletic cohorts. Relevant clinical trials were identified through a systematic search of databases in April 2023 including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane. Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were included if they compared patient-reported outcomes or complication rates of open Latarjet procedure vs. arthroscopic Bankart repair. Continuous data, such as patient-reported outcomes were pooled as the weighted mean difference. For dichotomous data such as recurrence and revision rates, the pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated using random effects meta-analysis. Twenty-one clinical studies (3 randomized controlled trials) were included in the meta-analysis involving a total of 13,176 operated shoulders. Arthroscopic Bankart showed a 3.08 times higher risk of recurrence and revision due to postoperative instability (RR = 3.08, 95% CI 2.03-4.68) compared with those who had the Latarjet approach. The Rowe score was higher in the Latarjet group by an average of 4.55 points (95% CI 2.41-6.68). This difference was more pronounced in athletes, with an increase of 5.47 points (95% CI 0.16-10.78), compared with the nonathletic population: 4.03 (95% CI 2.04-6.02). Return to sport time was shorter by 0.40 months (95% CI –0.75 to –0.05) in the Latarjet group. The total complication rate was approximately 47% lower in the Bankart group (RR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.31-0.90). Additionally, the risk of hematoma was 75% lower in patients undergoing the arthroscopic Bankart compared with the Latarjet procedure. External rotation, assessed both in abduction and adduction of the arm, as well as forward elevation, show no significant differences between the 2 groups. Our results demonstrate that the Latarjet procedure has a lower recurrence rate, excels in patient-reported outcomes, and requires less time for return to sports. Thus, it may be a superior alternative to arthros
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jse.2024.06.024
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3094043890</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1058274624005561</els_id><sourcerecordid>3094043890</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c235t-5e65037b4b56e1c556599a3f1e4380900fc7edfd3f66c6f4b60cfac0ebe301743</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc9u1DAQxiMEoqXwAFyQj1wSxknsNHBqK_5JK3GBs-U4Y9bBawfbqbQvxvMxyxaOnGY0-s2nme-rqpccGg5cvlmaJWPTQts3IBsqj6pLLrq2lgLgMfUgrut26OVF9SznBQDGHtqn1UU3csGlHC6rXzep7FPMJq7OsFsdfuhUWMJVu8Tuc8N2uui0YGFrigbnLSGzMRFhtpQwFJb3cfMzJuZCLnpy3pXjW6bZAYuuddD-mF1m0TLjXXBGexa3YuIBM9NhZtStnsbFxcCSLjR2gX3HgInQE6HL3mOh69a4bv4PmJ9XT6z2GV881Kvq24f3X-8-1bsvHz_f3exq03ai1ALJiW6Y-klI5EYIKcZRd5Zj313DCGDNgLOdOyulkbafJBirDeCEHfCh766q12dd-v7nhrmog8sGvdcB45ZVd3KUtEYglJ9RQ3bmhFatyR10OioO6hSXWhTFpU5xKZCKCu28epDfpgPO_zb-5kPAuzOA9OS9w6SycRgoCEcJFDVH9x_536rrquc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3094043890</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Arthroscopic Bankart repair vs. Latarjet procedure for recurrent shoulder instability: a meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complication rates in general and athletic populations</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Hossein Zadeh, Reza ; Daliri, Mahla ; Sadeghi, Masoumeh ; Hossein Zadeh, Rasoul ; Sahebi, Mahdieh ; Moradi, Ali ; Samei, Mahdieh ; Ebrahimzadeh, Mohammad H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Hossein Zadeh, Reza ; Daliri, Mahla ; Sadeghi, Masoumeh ; Hossein Zadeh, Rasoul ; Sahebi, Mahdieh ; Moradi, Ali ; Samei, Mahdieh ; Ebrahimzadeh, Mohammad H.</creatorcontrib><description>The Bankart repair and Latarjet procedure are both effective surgical methods for treating repeated recurrent anterior dislocation of the shoulder. However, there is still little consensus regarding the standard treatment for recurrent anterior instability of the shoulder. Typically, the choice of treatment has been influenced more by training and tradition rather than the existing evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare patient-reported outcomes, recurrence, and complications between the 2 procedures, among both athletic and nonathletic cohorts. Relevant clinical trials were identified through a systematic search of databases in April 2023 including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane. Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were included if they compared patient-reported outcomes or complication rates of open Latarjet procedure vs. arthroscopic Bankart repair. Continuous data, such as patient-reported outcomes were pooled as the weighted mean difference. For dichotomous data such as recurrence and revision rates, the pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated using random effects meta-analysis. Twenty-one clinical studies (3 randomized controlled trials) were included in the meta-analysis involving a total of 13,176 operated shoulders. Arthroscopic Bankart showed a 3.08 times higher risk of recurrence and revision due to postoperative instability (RR = 3.08, 95% CI 2.03-4.68) compared with those who had the Latarjet approach. The Rowe score was higher in the Latarjet group by an average of 4.55 points (95% CI 2.41-6.68). This difference was more pronounced in athletes, with an increase of 5.47 points (95% CI 0.16-10.78), compared with the nonathletic population: 4.03 (95% CI 2.04-6.02). Return to sport time was shorter by 0.40 months (95% CI –0.75 to –0.05) in the Latarjet group. The total complication rate was approximately 47% lower in the Bankart group (RR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.31-0.90). Additionally, the risk of hematoma was 75% lower in patients undergoing the arthroscopic Bankart compared with the Latarjet procedure. External rotation, assessed both in abduction and adduction of the arm, as well as forward elevation, show no significant differences between the 2 groups. Our results demonstrate that the Latarjet procedure has a lower recurrence rate, excels in patient-reported outcomes, and requires less time for return to sports. Thus, it may be a superior alternative to arthroscopic Bankart repair. However, it is still associated with a higher incidence of complications.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1058-2746</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1532-6500</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-6500</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2024.06.024</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39151667</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>anterior dislocation ; Arthroscopy - adverse effects ; Arthroscopy - methods ; Athletic Injuries - surgery ; Bankart ; Humans ; Joint Instability - surgery ; Latarjet ; meta-analysis ; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology ; Postoperative Complications - etiology ; Recurrence ; Shoulder Dislocation - surgery ; Shoulder instability ; Shoulder Joint - surgery ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery, 2024-12, Vol.33 (12), p.e652-e674</ispartof><rights>2024 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c235t-5e65037b4b56e1c556599a3f1e4380900fc7edfd3f66c6f4b60cfac0ebe301743</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9648-4684 ; 0000-0001-5796-8774</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2024.06.024$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,3537,27905,27906,45976</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39151667$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hossein Zadeh, Reza</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daliri, Mahla</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sadeghi, Masoumeh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hossein Zadeh, Rasoul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sahebi, Mahdieh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moradi, Ali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Samei, Mahdieh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ebrahimzadeh, Mohammad H.</creatorcontrib><title>Arthroscopic Bankart repair vs. Latarjet procedure for recurrent shoulder instability: a meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complication rates in general and athletic populations</title><title>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</title><addtitle>J Shoulder Elbow Surg</addtitle><description>The Bankart repair and Latarjet procedure are both effective surgical methods for treating repeated recurrent anterior dislocation of the shoulder. However, there is still little consensus regarding the standard treatment for recurrent anterior instability of the shoulder. Typically, the choice of treatment has been influenced more by training and tradition rather than the existing evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare patient-reported outcomes, recurrence, and complications between the 2 procedures, among both athletic and nonathletic cohorts. Relevant clinical trials were identified through a systematic search of databases in April 2023 including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane. Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were included if they compared patient-reported outcomes or complication rates of open Latarjet procedure vs. arthroscopic Bankart repair. Continuous data, such as patient-reported outcomes were pooled as the weighted mean difference. For dichotomous data such as recurrence and revision rates, the pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated using random effects meta-analysis. Twenty-one clinical studies (3 randomized controlled trials) were included in the meta-analysis involving a total of 13,176 operated shoulders. Arthroscopic Bankart showed a 3.08 times higher risk of recurrence and revision due to postoperative instability (RR = 3.08, 95% CI 2.03-4.68) compared with those who had the Latarjet approach. The Rowe score was higher in the Latarjet group by an average of 4.55 points (95% CI 2.41-6.68). This difference was more pronounced in athletes, with an increase of 5.47 points (95% CI 0.16-10.78), compared with the nonathletic population: 4.03 (95% CI 2.04-6.02). Return to sport time was shorter by 0.40 months (95% CI –0.75 to –0.05) in the Latarjet group. The total complication rate was approximately 47% lower in the Bankart group (RR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.31-0.90). Additionally, the risk of hematoma was 75% lower in patients undergoing the arthroscopic Bankart compared with the Latarjet procedure. External rotation, assessed both in abduction and adduction of the arm, as well as forward elevation, show no significant differences between the 2 groups. Our results demonstrate that the Latarjet procedure has a lower recurrence rate, excels in patient-reported outcomes, and requires less time for return to sports. Thus, it may be a superior alternative to arthroscopic Bankart repair. However, it is still associated with a higher incidence of complications.</description><subject>anterior dislocation</subject><subject>Arthroscopy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Arthroscopy - methods</subject><subject>Athletic Injuries - surgery</subject><subject>Bankart</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Joint Instability - surgery</subject><subject>Latarjet</subject><subject>meta-analysis</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - epidemiology</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - etiology</subject><subject>Recurrence</subject><subject>Shoulder Dislocation - surgery</subject><subject>Shoulder instability</subject><subject>Shoulder Joint - surgery</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1058-2746</issn><issn>1532-6500</issn><issn>1532-6500</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc9u1DAQxiMEoqXwAFyQj1wSxknsNHBqK_5JK3GBs-U4Y9bBawfbqbQvxvMxyxaOnGY0-s2nme-rqpccGg5cvlmaJWPTQts3IBsqj6pLLrq2lgLgMfUgrut26OVF9SznBQDGHtqn1UU3csGlHC6rXzep7FPMJq7OsFsdfuhUWMJVu8Tuc8N2uui0YGFrigbnLSGzMRFhtpQwFJb3cfMzJuZCLnpy3pXjW6bZAYuuddD-mF1m0TLjXXBGexa3YuIBM9NhZtStnsbFxcCSLjR2gX3HgInQE6HL3mOh69a4bv4PmJ9XT6z2GV881Kvq24f3X-8-1bsvHz_f3exq03ai1ALJiW6Y-klI5EYIKcZRd5Zj313DCGDNgLOdOyulkbafJBirDeCEHfCh766q12dd-v7nhrmog8sGvdcB45ZVd3KUtEYglJ9RQ3bmhFatyR10OioO6hSXWhTFpU5xKZCKCu28epDfpgPO_zb-5kPAuzOA9OS9w6SycRgoCEcJFDVH9x_536rrquc</recordid><startdate>202412</startdate><enddate>202412</enddate><creator>Hossein Zadeh, Reza</creator><creator>Daliri, Mahla</creator><creator>Sadeghi, Masoumeh</creator><creator>Hossein Zadeh, Rasoul</creator><creator>Sahebi, Mahdieh</creator><creator>Moradi, Ali</creator><creator>Samei, Mahdieh</creator><creator>Ebrahimzadeh, Mohammad H.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9648-4684</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5796-8774</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202412</creationdate><title>Arthroscopic Bankart repair vs. Latarjet procedure for recurrent shoulder instability: a meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complication rates in general and athletic populations</title><author>Hossein Zadeh, Reza ; Daliri, Mahla ; Sadeghi, Masoumeh ; Hossein Zadeh, Rasoul ; Sahebi, Mahdieh ; Moradi, Ali ; Samei, Mahdieh ; Ebrahimzadeh, Mohammad H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c235t-5e65037b4b56e1c556599a3f1e4380900fc7edfd3f66c6f4b60cfac0ebe301743</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>anterior dislocation</topic><topic>Arthroscopy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Arthroscopy - methods</topic><topic>Athletic Injuries - surgery</topic><topic>Bankart</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Joint Instability - surgery</topic><topic>Latarjet</topic><topic>meta-analysis</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - epidemiology</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - etiology</topic><topic>Recurrence</topic><topic>Shoulder Dislocation - surgery</topic><topic>Shoulder instability</topic><topic>Shoulder Joint - surgery</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hossein Zadeh, Reza</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daliri, Mahla</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sadeghi, Masoumeh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hossein Zadeh, Rasoul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sahebi, Mahdieh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moradi, Ali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Samei, Mahdieh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ebrahimzadeh, Mohammad H.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hossein Zadeh, Reza</au><au>Daliri, Mahla</au><au>Sadeghi, Masoumeh</au><au>Hossein Zadeh, Rasoul</au><au>Sahebi, Mahdieh</au><au>Moradi, Ali</au><au>Samei, Mahdieh</au><au>Ebrahimzadeh, Mohammad H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Arthroscopic Bankart repair vs. Latarjet procedure for recurrent shoulder instability: a meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complication rates in general and athletic populations</atitle><jtitle>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</jtitle><addtitle>J Shoulder Elbow Surg</addtitle><date>2024-12</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>33</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>e652</spage><epage>e674</epage><pages>e652-e674</pages><issn>1058-2746</issn><issn>1532-6500</issn><eissn>1532-6500</eissn><abstract>The Bankart repair and Latarjet procedure are both effective surgical methods for treating repeated recurrent anterior dislocation of the shoulder. However, there is still little consensus regarding the standard treatment for recurrent anterior instability of the shoulder. Typically, the choice of treatment has been influenced more by training and tradition rather than the existing evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare patient-reported outcomes, recurrence, and complications between the 2 procedures, among both athletic and nonathletic cohorts. Relevant clinical trials were identified through a systematic search of databases in April 2023 including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane. Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were included if they compared patient-reported outcomes or complication rates of open Latarjet procedure vs. arthroscopic Bankart repair. Continuous data, such as patient-reported outcomes were pooled as the weighted mean difference. For dichotomous data such as recurrence and revision rates, the pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated using random effects meta-analysis. Twenty-one clinical studies (3 randomized controlled trials) were included in the meta-analysis involving a total of 13,176 operated shoulders. Arthroscopic Bankart showed a 3.08 times higher risk of recurrence and revision due to postoperative instability (RR = 3.08, 95% CI 2.03-4.68) compared with those who had the Latarjet approach. The Rowe score was higher in the Latarjet group by an average of 4.55 points (95% CI 2.41-6.68). This difference was more pronounced in athletes, with an increase of 5.47 points (95% CI 0.16-10.78), compared with the nonathletic population: 4.03 (95% CI 2.04-6.02). Return to sport time was shorter by 0.40 months (95% CI –0.75 to –0.05) in the Latarjet group. The total complication rate was approximately 47% lower in the Bankart group (RR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.31-0.90). Additionally, the risk of hematoma was 75% lower in patients undergoing the arthroscopic Bankart compared with the Latarjet procedure. External rotation, assessed both in abduction and adduction of the arm, as well as forward elevation, show no significant differences between the 2 groups. Our results demonstrate that the Latarjet procedure has a lower recurrence rate, excels in patient-reported outcomes, and requires less time for return to sports. Thus, it may be a superior alternative to arthroscopic Bankart repair. However, it is still associated with a higher incidence of complications.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>39151667</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jse.2024.06.024</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9648-4684</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5796-8774</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1058-2746
ispartof Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery, 2024-12, Vol.33 (12), p.e652-e674
issn 1058-2746
1532-6500
1532-6500
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3094043890
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects anterior dislocation
Arthroscopy - adverse effects
Arthroscopy - methods
Athletic Injuries - surgery
Bankart
Humans
Joint Instability - surgery
Latarjet
meta-analysis
Postoperative Complications - epidemiology
Postoperative Complications - etiology
Recurrence
Shoulder Dislocation - surgery
Shoulder instability
Shoulder Joint - surgery
Treatment Outcome
title Arthroscopic Bankart repair vs. Latarjet procedure for recurrent shoulder instability: a meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complication rates in general and athletic populations
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T12%3A45%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Arthroscopic%20Bankart%20repair%20vs.%20Latarjet%20procedure%20for%20recurrent%20shoulder%20instability:%20a%20meta-analysis%20of%20clinical%20outcomes%20and%20complication%20rates%20in%20general%20and%20athletic%20populations&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20shoulder%20and%20elbow%20surgery&rft.au=Hossein%20Zadeh,%20Reza&rft.date=2024-12&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=e652&rft.epage=e674&rft.pages=e652-e674&rft.issn=1058-2746&rft.eissn=1532-6500&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jse.2024.06.024&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3094043890%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3094043890&rft_id=info:pmid/39151667&rft_els_id=S1058274624005561&rfr_iscdi=true